EXCLUSIVE: Arkansas Supreme Court race may be nonpartisan, but one candidate has a long history of being a Democratic activist
Arkansas Justice Nick Bronni's challenger has a long history of work as a Democrat. Here's what we found.
Arkansas voters will soon decide a high-profile race for the Arkansas Supreme Court that is officially nonpartisan but has drawn scrutiny over the partisan background of one candidate. John Adams, who is challenging incumbent Justice Nick Bronni, has a long public record of political activism aligned with the Democratic Party.
Public records show that Adams ran for Congress in 2010 as a Democrat, according to coverage in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. He later ran again as a Democrat in 2014, this time for the Arkansas House of Representatives, a race documented in Ballotpedia and the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette’s election reporting.
Federal Election Commission (FEC) data also shows that an individual listed as “John Adams” contributed $500 to Hillary for America in 2016, a donation recorded in the FEC’s searchable filings.
These are not minor or ambiguous affiliations. They are formal candidacies and federal contributions that place Adams firmly inside the Democratic political ecosystem. Republican strategists in Arkansas argue that while the race is labeled nonpartisan, voters in one of the most conservative states in the country are being asked to elevate a long-time Democratic activist to the state’s highest court.
Bronni, the incumbent justice and former Arkansas Solicitor General, has consolidated support throughout the conservative legal community. Bronni has received endorsements from Sen. Tom Cotton (R., Ark.), who has publicly praised Bronni’s legal judgment and record of service to Arkansas, as well as from the Republican Party of Arkansas, which is backing him as the candidate who will apply the law as written. Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Attorney General Tim Griffin, and many other Republican leaders have also endorsed Bronni.
The contrast between the two candidates is shaping the race. Arkansas judicial contests are technically nonpartisan, but the political histories of the candidates routinely inform how voters interpret their campaigns. In this race the record on Adams is especially clear and unusually public. He has twice run for office as a Democrat and financially supported Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. Republican officials say the claim that Adams is a neutral, apolitical jurist does not withstand scrutiny.
As the March election approaches, conservatives in Arkansas are moving to ensure that voters understand the stakes. In their view, this is not simply a judicial election but a test of whether a Democratic activist can rebrand himself as a nonpartisan figure in a state where Democratic candidates have struggled for more than a decade. The outcome will signal whether judicial races remain an avenue for ideological activists to gain statewide office under the cover of a nonpartisan ballot.